On 2015-05-04 21:42, Rory Jaffe wrote:
The UUID itself refers to the filesystem as a whole, not that specific partition, so even if the original drive fails, the UUID will still properly reference the filesystem (whether or not you can mount it is a whole separate issue, as a missing device usually means you need some manual intervention for recovery).Question about fault tolerance and choice of ID. I'm running btrfs with subvolumes for / and /home. /boot and grub are on a thumb drive. I have six drives in the system, running raid1 for both data and metadata. When I run "sudo btrfs fi show" it provides both the label and the uuid. The UUID shown is the same as that for the first partition that btrfs was installed on. In fstab, the mount points currently use that UUID to identify the file system. If the original drive fails, will that UUID still point to the filesystem, or is it better to use the label for the filesystem? Will the filesystem mount in either case with the failure of the original drive?
Personally, I prefer to use labels in fstab, as it makes it much more obvious what is what ( and labels are usually much more compact than UUID's), although this can cause issues if you aren't careful (multiple filesystems with the same label gets really interesting when trying to mount by label). Additionally, on sufficiently recent distributions, you might be able to use PARTUUID or PARTLABEL to id individual partitions in /etc/fstab, although the disk needs to have a partition table format that actually supports this (GPT is the only one I know of, although there may be others).
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
